2
The obstinate conservatism with which the classical comparative cost thinking has been retai­ned in theory as something more than a pedagogical introduction - or a model for the treatment of a few special problems - is evidence that, even today, there is in many quarters an insuffi­cient understanding of this fundamental fact. It follows that not only the comparative cost model but also the factor proportions model can only be applied in special cases and used as a general introduction to illuminate the character of trade in some essential aspects... It is characteristic of the developing countries that a good many factors do not exist at all and that the quality of others differs from factors in the industrialized countries. This means that a simple method of analysis - such as the factor proportions model - which does not take this into account is to some extent unrealistic. Bertil Ohlin (1967) Interregional and International Trade, Cambridge (Mass), Harvard UP 308f. (stress in or.)

14
Country Programmable Aid (CPA) “is the portion of aid donors programme for individual countries, and over which partner countries could have a significant say. Developed in 2007 in close collaboration with OECD DAC members, CPA is much closer to capturing the flows of aid that go to the partner countries than the concept of Official Development Assistance (ODA).” Source: OECD CPA: “(1) inherently unpredictable (such as humanitarian aid and debt relief); or (2) entails no flows to the recipient country (administration, student costs, development awareness and research and refugee spending in donor countries); or (3) is usually not discussed between the main donor agency and recipient governments (food aid, aid from local governments, core funding to international NGOs, aid through secondary agencies, ODA equity investments and aid which is not allocable by country). Finally, (4), CPA does not net out loan repayments, as these are not usually factored into aid allocation decisions.”

15
ODA Composition 2011 Source: OECD 2013

16
The Millennium Development Goals Eight Goals for Eradicate extreme poverty and hunger 2. Achieve universal primary education 3. Promote gender equality and empower women 4. Reduce child mortality 5. Improve maternal health 6. Combat HIV/AIDS, malaria and other diseases 7. Ensure environmental sustainability 8. Develop a global partnership for development Goal 1. Eradicate extreme poverty and hungerEradicate extreme poverty and hunger Target 1: Reduce by half the proportion of people living on less than a dollar a day Indicators: 1. Proportion of population below $1 (PPP) per day 2. Poverty gap ratio, $1 per day 3. Share of poorest quintile in national income or consumption Target 2: Reduce by half the proportion of people who suffer from hunger Indicators: 4. Prevalence of underweight children under five years of age 5. Proportion of the population below minimum level of dietary energy consumption

17
Paris Declaration on Aid Effectiveness (2005) 1. Ownership: Developing countries set their own strategies for poverty reduction, improve their institutions and tackle corruption. 2. Alignment: Donor countries align behind these objectives and use local systems. 3. Harmonisation: Donor countries coordinate, simplify procedures and share information to avoid duplication. 4. Results: Developing countries and donors shift focus to development results and results get measured. 5. Mutual accountability: Donors and partners are accountable for development results. Accra Agenda for Action (2008) Ownership Inclusive partnerships: All partners - including donors in the OECD DAC and developing countries, as well as other donors, foundations and civil society - participate fully. Delivering results: Aid is focused on real and measurable impact on development. Capacity development: ability of SCs to manage own future - also lies at the heart of AAA

18
Busan Partnership (2011) “result of an inclusive year-long process of consultation” – “sets out principles, commitments and actions that offer a foundation for effective co-operation in support of international development.” Is the Busan Partnership document legally binding? How will implementation be ensured? “The Busan Partnership document does not take the form of a binding agreement or international treaty. It is not signed, and does not give rise to legal obligations. Rather, it is a statement of consensus that a wide range of governments and organisations have expressed their support for, offering a framework for continued dialogue and efforts to enhance the effectiveness of development co-operation. The Busan Partnership document foresees the establishment of a Global Partnership for Effective Development Co-operation, which will support and help ensure accountability for implementation at the political level. A light framework will be agreed through which progress will be monitored and mutual accountability supported.”